Gujarat High Court
Goodluck Trading Company vs State Of Gujarat & 4 on 16 March, 2016
Author: A.J.Desai
Bench: A.J.Desai
C/SCA/3528/2016 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3528 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI Sd/-
=========================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be NO
allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair NO
copy of the judgment ?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial NO
question of law as to the interpretation of the
constitution of India, 1950 or any order made
thereunder ?
===========================================================
GOODLUCK TRADING COMPANY....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 4....Respondents
=========================================
Appearance :
MR AMIT V THAKKAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner.
MR V. R. JANI, AGP for the Respondent No.1 ON ADVANCE COPY.
=========================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 16/03/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. I have heard Mr. Amit V. Thakkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. V.R. Jani, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 on an advance copy.
2. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Thu Mar 17 03:05:11 IST 2016 C/SCA/3528/2016 JUDGMENT the respondents.
3. Considering the issue involved in this petition and with consent of learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for its final disposal forthwith.
4. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s) :-
"[A] THIS HONOURABLE COURT may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and may be pleased to direct the respondent - State Government to consider the pending representations of the petitioner, before sanctioning the preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bhatar - Majura) which is pending before the respondent - State Government and allot separate final plot of area admeasuring 1500 Sq. Mts. In the Preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bharat - Majura), Surat to the petitioner.
[B] Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent - State Government to consider the pending representations of the petitioner, before sanctioning the preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bhatar - Majura) which is pending before the respondent - State Government and allot separate final plot of Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Thu Mar 17 03:05:11 IST 2016 C/SCA/3528/2016 JUDGMENT area admeasuring 1500 Sq. Mts. In the Preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bhatar - Majura), Surat to the petitioner.
5. Mr. Amit Thakkar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that Preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bhatar - Majura) is not finalized and, therefore, the respondent No.1 may be directed to consider the representations made by the petitioner.
6. In light of the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the scheme is submitted to the State Government as provided under Section 64 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 ("the Act" for short). In view of the same, the stand taken by the respondent State that the petition is premature, deserves to be upheld. However, at the same time, it is incumbent upon the State Government to consider the objections that are filed by the petitioner. It is further provided that the contentions raised in this petition be treated as further representation for and on behalf of the petitioner and the State Government shall consider the same while and before sanctioning Preliminary Town Planning Scheme No.27 (Bhatar - Majura) Surat and shall take appropriate decision before any Notification under Section 65(3) of the Act is issued in relation to the said Town Planning Scheme. The petitioner shall serve copy of this order and memo of the petition along with the annexures upon respondent No.1 latest by 28th March, 2016.
7. With these observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. Rule is discharged. Direct service is permitted. No costs.
Sd/-
(A.J.DESAI, J.) Savariya Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Thu Mar 17 03:05:11 IST 2016